HAL Id: hal-00686500
https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00686500
Submitted on 1 Dec 2012
HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entic research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.
L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diusion de documents
scientiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.
Information systems for enterprise integration,
interoperability and networking: theory and applications
Hervé Panetto, Joe Cecil
To cite this version:
Hervé Panetto, Joe Cecil. Information systems for enterprise integration, interoperability and net-
working: theory and applications. Enterprise Information Systems, Taylor & Francis, 2013, 7 (1),
pp.1-6. �10.1080/17517575.2012.684802�. �hal-00686500�
Information Systems for Enterprise Integration, Interoperability
and Networking: Theory and Applications
HervéPanetto
1
andJ.Cecil
2
1
ResearchCentreforAutomaticControl,UniversityofLorraine,CNRS,SchoolofEngineeringin
InformationTechnology,France,Herve.Panetto@univ‐lorraine.fr.
2
CenterforInformationbasedBioengineeringandManufacturing,SchoolofIndustrialEngineeringand
Management,OklahomaStateUniversity,USA,j.cecil@okstate.edu
Introduction
Today,enterprisescanbecharacterizedbyvariouskeyfacets:globalization,distributedmanufacturing,
data and knowledge management, advanced automation and robotics, virtual engineering, rapid
response to market and more. In today’s competitive
economy, enterprises need collaborating using
Information Technology (IT) and other tools to succeed in this dynamic and heterogeneous business
environment.Enterprise integration,interoperabilityandnetworking aresomeof the major disciplines
thatareenablingcompaniestoimprovecollaborationandcommunicationinthemosteffectiveway.In
this direction, the enterprise information
systems engineering process aims to develop information
systemstorespondtoincreasinglycomplexobjectives,toaligntheseinformationsystemswithbusiness
goals and processes of the company, or simply to adapt and improve them when facing given
requirements or rapidly changing opportunities. As enterprise information systems models become
moreubiquitous,
thesharingofbest‐in‐classmodelsbecomesmoredesirable.Interoperabilitybetween
dissimilarsystemsinsharinginformationisimportant,butotheraspectsarealsorequiredinthesharing
ofenterprisesystemsknowledge.First,thisprocessisbasedontheneedforcollaboration,sharingand
mutual understanding of the needs of each
stakeholder i.e. each persons involved or affected by the
future information system, at each stage of its development. Second, this process follows principles
which highlight the need for formal semantics de finition of these models to facilitate this work, at
variousabstraction levelsrangingfrom specificationtoimplementationonsite.There
isaneedto also
couple new theoretical results with applied methods and tools supporting existing business
reconfigurationandtransformationbothlocallyandglobally.
In this editorial, we reflect on the current and future theory and applications that would further
empowernetworkedenterprisesbymeansofcollaborativeinformationsystems.Wedo
thisinspiredby
thearticlesinthisspecialissue,whichare6revisedextendedversions(from32submission s)ofselected
bestpapersofthe5
th
InternationalworkshoponEnterpriseIntegration,InteroperabilityandNetworking
(EI2N’2010),andthe18
th
CooperativeInformationSystemsConference(CoopIS’2010),partsoftheOTM
Federated Conferences, held on October 25‐29, 2010 in Crete, Greece. In addition, we discuss new
paradigms that may have considerable impact on Information Systems design in the context of next
generationcollaborativeandvirtualenterprises.
EnterpriseIntegrationandInteroperability
Enterprise integration is a domain of research developed since 1990’s as the extension of Computer
IntegratedManufacturing(CIM).Enterpriseintegrationresearchismainlycarriedoutwithintwodistinct
research communities: Enterprise modelling andInformationTechnology(IT).The notion ofEnterprise
Integrationasitisunderstood inthe
contextofenterprisemodellingreferstoarangeofconceptsand
approaches including the definition of a global architecture of the system, the consistency of system‐
widedecisionmaking(coherencesbetweenlocalandglobalobjectives),thenotionoftheprocesswhich
modelsactivityflowbeyondthebordersoffunctions,the
dynamicallocationofresourcesaswellasthe
consistencyofdata[1].Itisimportanttorecognizethatenterpriseintegrationisanessentialcomponent
of enterprise engineering which concerns the set of methods, models and tools that one can use to
analyzedesignwhileachievingintegration.Enterpriseintegrationcanbeviewed
indifferentintegration
levelsaccordingtotheinterestofthestudy.TheEuropeanstandardisationcommitteeCENTC310/WG1
has recognised three levels of integration: (1) Physical Integration (interconnection of devices, NC
machines, PLCs, via computer networks), (2) Application Integration (dealing with interoperability of
software applications and database systems in heterogeneous computing
environments) and (3)
BusinessIntegration(co‐ordinationoffunctionsthatmanage,controlandmonitorbusinessprocesses).
Integrationcanbeobtainedintermsof:(1)data(datamodelling),(2)organisation(modellingofsystems
and processes) and (3) communication (modelling of computer networks, for example the 7‐layer OSI
model). Integration can be
total, i.e. the standard is the software or system itself. Integration can be
achieved by unification (the possible standards are methods, architectures, constructs and reusable
partialmodels)orbyfederation(thepossiblestandardsareinterfaces,referencemodelsorontologies).
Since theend of 1990’s enterpriseintegration approacheshave to address
the emerging emphasis on
‘Enterpriseinteroperability’.Enterpriseinteroperabilityisbelieved tobemoreadaptable(lesscost and
quickerimplementation)indecentralised,flexibleand networkedsystemenvironmentsforproductand
processdesignenvironmentsincludingmanufacturing.Generally,interoperabilityreferstocoexistence,
autonomyandfeder at edenvironments,whereasintegrationreferstotheconceptsofcoordination
and
coherency.Fromthepointofviewofdegreeofcoupling,the‘tightlycoup ledsystem’indicatesthatthe
components are interdependent and cannot be separated. Therefore it is the case of an integrated
system.The‘looselycoupledsystem’referstothecomponentsthatareconnectedbyacommunication
network; they
can exchange services while continuing their own logic of operation. Integration is
generally considered to go beyond mere interoperability to involve some degree of functional
dependence [2]. While interoperable systems can function independently, an integrated system loses
significant functionality if the flow of services isinterrupted. An integrated family of systems
must,of
necessity, be interoperable, but interoperable systems do not mean they are completely integrated.
Integration also deals with organisational issues, in possibly a less formalised manner due to dealing
withpeople,butintegrationismuchmoredifficulttosolve,whileinteroperabilityismoreofatechnical
issue.Compatibilityis
somethinglessthaninteroperability.Itmeansthatsystems/unitsdonotinterfere
with each other’s functioning. Interoperable systems are by necessity compatible, but the conve rse is
notnecessarilytrue.
Applicationintegrationconcernsinteroperabilityofapplicationsonheterogeneousplatforms.This type
of integration allows access to shared data by the various remote applications. Distributed processing
environments,commonservicesfortheexecutionenvironment,applicationprograminterfaces(API's),
and standard data exchange formats are necessary at this level to build cooperative systems.
Application
integrationstarted inthemid1980's and is still on‐going with very activeworkconcerning
STEP,EDI, HTML, XML, or eb‐XMLfortheexchangeof commonshareddata, development ofcommon
services for open systems around the web (web‐services), integration platforms for interoperable
applicationsindistributedenvironments
(e.g.OSF/DCE,OMG/CORBA,WSDL,andmorerecentlyJ2EEor
Java to Enterprise Edition environments and .NET). Other tools used at this level are workflow
managementsystems(WfMS)andcomputersupporttocollaborativework–CSCW[3].
EnterpriseInformationSystemsasakeyfeatureforEnterpriseInteroperability
Businessintegrationisconsideredas
akeysteptowardsthenetworkedenterprise.Startingthephysical
integration at lower level to move towards business integration is typically a bottom up engineering
approach.Integrationatlowerlevelshasoftenimpactsonthebusine ssrunatthehigherlevel,thusto
business integration. The process of bottom‐up
integration needs to be combined with a top‐down
global design to define consistent global enterprise architecture so that incremental bottom up
integration implementation can be based on long term strategy of the company. Even when business
integrationhasbeenachievedatonepointintime,businessopportunities,newtechnologies,modified
legislation will make integration a vision rather than an achievable goal. In this sense, enterprise
integrationisalsoseenasamethodologicalprocesstoperiodicallymeasuringthegapbetweendesired
integrationgoaland actual status ofthe system,andtoadjustboth the goal and integrationactions if
necessary[4].
Vernadat [5] defines interoperability as the ability to communicate with pier systems and access the
functionalityofthepiersystems.Establishinginteroperabilitymeanstorelatetwosystemstogetherand
remove any incompatibilities in between. Incompatibility is a fundamental concept used in
interoperability domain. It is the obstacle to establish seamless interoperation.
The concept
‘incompatibility’hasabroadsenseandisnotonlylimitedto ‘technical’aspect asusuallyconsideredin
softwareengineering,butalso‘information’,‘organisation’and‘semantics’[6],andconcernsalllevelsof
an enterprise. Another fundamental consideration is the generic characteristic of the interoperability
research. Indeed there are generic
problems and solutions regardless of the content of information
exchanged between two systems. Semantic frameworks hold the potential to address interoperability
issuesthroughuseof ontology.Inthecontext ofvirtualenterprises,suchanapproach enablesdiverse
organizations to formpartnershipsbased on rapidly emergingmarket needs which aretranslated into
new product development opportunities [7]. From another pointof view and according to ISO 14258,
therearethreewaystodevelopinteroperability:
‐ Integrated where there is a standard format for all constituent systems. Diverse models are
interpreted in the standard format. This format must be as rich as the
constituent system
models.
‐ Unified where there is a common meta‐level structure across constituent models, providing a
meansforestablishingsemanticequivalence.
‐ Federated where models must be dynamically accommodated rather than having a
predetermined meta‐model. This assumes that concept mapping is done at an ontology le vel,
i.e.se mant iclevel.
The federated
approach is seenas the most interesting one todevelop full interoperability. However,
the choice depends on the context and requirements. If the need of interoperability comes from a
merger of enterprise s, the integrated approach would be the most adapted one. If the need of
interoperabilityconcernsalongterm
basedcollaboration,theunified approachseemsagoodsolution.
For that, a common meta‐model across partners’ mode ls provides a means for establishing semantic
equivalence allowing mapping between diverse models. On the other h and, for a need of
interoperability originated from the short‐term collaboration project (e.g. virtual enterprise) the
federated
approach can be used. To interoperate partners must dynamically adapt to achieve an
agreement[8].
Anoverviewofthe6papersinthisspecialissuefollows.
NewtheoryandapplicationsforEnterpriseIntegration,InteroperabilityandNetworking
Enterprise Inte roperability (EI) is a well‐established area of applied research that addresses the
problems related with the lack of systems and applications’ interoperability in organisations, and
proposes novel solutions for EI problems. However, in spite of research efforts to date, the proper
scientificfoundationsforEIremainelusive.Thishaspreventedthe generalisation and fullreuse of the
methods and to ols that have been
developedsofar. Jardim‐Gonçalves and Grilo[9]contributeto this
important issue by identifying the main characteristics related to of the scientific foundations of the
EnterpriseInteroperability(EI)researchdomain,systematizingthestateofartinthisdomain.Therecent
efforts developed by this community, in developing an Enterprise
Interoperability Science Foundation
within the so‐called “Interoperability Body of Knowledge (IBoK)” demonstrates a growing interest in
developing the subject of Interoperability in a more systematic and scientific way. The study of
Interoperabilitycanbedevelopeddependingontheoreticalworkundertakenatthreelevelsofessential
specificity,includingframeworks,theories,and
models.Thekeyresearchquestionsaddressedis:How
canthesystematisationofIBoKcontributetothefoundationsofEIasascience?Twohypotheseshave
been laid downto address the research question, namely:(1) the Enterprise Interoperability Scientific
Foundation should address IBoK at the levels of frameworks, theories,
and models and make a gap
analysis of where current academic scientificstate‐of‐the‐art is and where it needsto go; (2) Analysis
conducted at each IBoK level provides different degrees of specificity related to a particular
Interoperabilityproblem.
Franke et al. [10] propose a framework for temporal coordination
of activities in dynamic situations.
The domain of disaster response management is used to elaborate on the framework proposed. The
author highlights the importance of this domain in light of recent disasters such as Hurrican Katrina
(2005)andtheHaitiEarthquakes(2010).Duringsuchdisasters,theoverallsituationisdynamic
innature